Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

People Must Stop Believing in the Free Market Fairies

Posted by Heroesall, Unstuffed at 8:53 AM on February 8, 2009.


Even now, with the world economy swirling down the S-bend, we hear some hardy souls claiming that 'the free market will fix it.'
fairiesall

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace in your
mailbox!

 

Even now, with the world economy swirling down the S-bend, we hear some hardy souls claiming that ‘the free market will fix it’.

Sadly for us, the free market fairies are unlikely to flit along and clean up our mess while we sleep. Why not? Well, I hate to break it to you, but they don’t exist.

That’s not, as the free market fundamentalists like to claim, because we regulate too much. It’s because the free market theory is based on some wacky assumptions – if those assumptions aren’t true, then the whole theory crashes to the ground.

Two of these assumptions are that:

  • People have perfect knowledge of the value of what they’re buying or selling
  • People never base buying or selling decisions based on what other people are doing.

If I ever find a trader working like that, I’ll notify the media. Clearly, if this were true, there’d be no such thing as bubbles or stock runs. In fact, the financial system is more like soccer – someone makes up the rules, only one team ever wins, and occasionally someone gets kicked in the head. The only difference is that financiers rarely wear very short shorts. And not many get sent off the field for bad behavior.

I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: the utopian free market doesn’t exist. It can’t exist. It’s based on a mis-interpretation of Adam Smith and what John Cleese might call the blinkered, philistine, pig-ignorance of economists, blithely holding on to abstract concepts that have no relationship to the real world. So we have to stop basing all of our financial decisions on what might happen if those free market fairies really existed, and start basing our decisions on what happens here on Planet Real.

And just like soccer, we can change the rules of our financial systems. This is a particularly good idea since the rules we’ve got now don’t work all that well, unless you’re a squillionaire. The current system has the effect of pumping money from the poor to the rich, and, aside from any moral qualms we might have about that, it means that the economy slows down because nobody’s got any money.

So what can we do? Well, there’s a whole passel of stuff that would help. For starters, some regulation wouldn’t hurt. If bizarre credit derivatives can’t be banned outright, then a variant of the Tobin tax could be applied - a tax on all transactions between institutions in order to discourage the toxic tangle that’s eating the financial system.

It’s also a very good idea to direct some of the bailout billions towards calming the housing crisis in the US. If governmental power and billions of dollars can’t stop people being turfed out of their homes while CEOs ride the cash wave, then it should be blatantly obvious to anyone with more than 3 brain cells to rub together that our economic system no longer serves the common good and should be replaced entire. I’ve got a few suggestions there, which I’ll talk about in coming weeks.

Yes, there’s a certain amount of horse and stable door about this. If we’d been clever, we would have stopped this nonsense before it ate New York, but right now we’re definitely looking at the back end of a fast-moving horse, and at least we might be able to stop some others bolting.

What’s vital at this stage is to accept that our entire economic system is fatally flawed, and to stop trying to put band-aids on a patient that’s spouting blood in a hundred directions. Every single effort by our governments should be towards changing the system, not just propping it up.

I’ll have some more suggestions over the coming weeks, but for now, you can at least start pointing the finger of scorn at free market fundamentalists, and perhaps contacting your representatives to convince them that yet another short-term fix of a fairy-based economy isn’t what we need.

Digg!

Tagged as: economy, depression, jobs, free market, econopocalypse, free market fairies


After 5 Weeks, 3 GOP Filibusters and 200,000 Americans Running Out of Bennies, Obama to Sign Unemployment Extension
This is how things work in DC these days.
Post by Steve Benen. November 6, 2009.
Unemployment Hits 10.2 Percent, Economy Sheds 190,000 Jobs
A run-down of the employment picture.
Post by Dean Baker. November 6, 2009.
Meet Some of the People Who Have Jobs Thanks to Obama's Recovery Act
640,329 jobs were created or saved. But the true significance of this number lies in the people behind it.
Post by Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins. November 4, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Followup, please!
Posted by: oregoncharles on Feb 8, 2009 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We could use a more detailed followup to this, showing the ways that current Economics betray the basic theory.

In reality, of course, economists talk about "market failure" all the time: that's the situation in which the basic requirements for a functional market can't be met. The most familiar is "utilities," where the technology calls for a natural monopoly (How many powerlines to our house do we want?), so the government regulates pricing and service.

Another example is medicine. One requirement for a market is that knowledge be fairly equal. Do you know as much about medicine as your doctor? There is also a conspiracy to keep you from knowing which are the best (and worst) doctors - the information exists, it just isn't public. And, of course, you're typically making medical decisions when you're in no condition to make any decisions. Nor do we "price shop" for doctors. Lives are at stake, so we look for the best, not the cheapest. When the patient is a loved one rather than ourselves, it would be immoral to worry about the price.

For all these reasons, the market doesn't work well in medicine.

Those are just a couple of examples: there are legions.

In general, markets are a useful servant and a bad master. We need to understand better when they fail and when we're being scammed. In particular, any kind of concentration of power - as when one company buys another - is against the public interest. But we see both administrations encouraging the banks to buy each other, further monopolizing the already-failed market in money.

That is politics, not economics, and we could use a better understanding of their interaction. What we have now is mostly a fraud, perpetuated at the behest of the moguls.

Trouble is, it takes good writing, because people's eyes glaze over quickly when you talk about economics. I've tried it. I bet yours already have.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Followup, please! Posted by: HeroesAll
The free market works as designed
Posted by: rickiey on Feb 8, 2009 12:47 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Under a couple of conditions:

The first condition, is that the market is truly free. You can't put restrictions on the free market, watch it fail, and then say "the free market doesn't work. That is akin to hitching a deisal to the back of Lance Armstrong's bike with the brakrs on, and saying he's a poor cyclist.

The second condition, and the one that we as progressives have the biggest problem with, is losers. In a free market, there are winners and there are losers and there are those in between.

The safety net of the losers, is not the economy or the government, but the charity of the winners.

In a free market, equal outcome is not only guaranteed, but it is not even desired. The presumption, is that the opportunity is equal, and that the only difference in outcome is the actions of the individual.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The free market works as designed Posted by: Mrs. Jefferson
bear of very little brain
Posted by: percipi22 on Feb 8, 2009 2:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you are correct the "free market" ideology does work as designed...if you mean holding govt. and people hostage world wide by withholding all the money and using the cia to terrorize those who will not comply and taking advantage of disasters real or contrived? yes it works brilliantly....if your intention is to kill small business, ruin unions, marginalize anyone who fights back, disappear folks, torture, kill, put despots in place and then twenty years later make war on them and kill the leader the U.S. put in place...? its bloody brilliant. If it means shoving down our throats bank bailouts in three days and then straining over money for infrastructure, education, and all the other horribly neglected "populist" "socialist" programs aka dirty words ...yeah its a screaming success....but don't expect to benefit...only as a wage slave..buying at the company store....don't buy anything....don't pay credit cards...lets all start shanty towns in the empty malls, tear up the parking lots start gardens....see were the King will be at that point without his peasants......the revolution starts now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the fairy god-mother of "free" markets
Posted by: Gregsdiary on Feb 8, 2009 4:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every single effort by our governments should be towards changing the system, not just propping it up.

Only problem is, Obama and the Democrats are still telling market tales--instead of changing the system of healthcare by removing the profit-motive where it never belonged in the first place:

"Another important aspect of President Obama's health care reform plan is the addition of a public health insurance plan option to drive more value in our health care system by competing side-by-side with private insurance and using its bargaining power to rein in costs."

Ah yes, the magic of "competition,"--it's the fairy god-mother of "free" markets that still enchants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" will educate anyone as to the fallacy of "free markets".
Posted by: thekidde on Feb 9, 2009 5:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our flawed system has been hijacked.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Feb 9, 2009 9:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Every single effort by our governments should be towards changing the system, not just propping it up."

Nobody in our government wants to change the system, because the system as it is works very well for them, both through the bri... uh..."campaign contributions" they get while in office, and by the cushy executive jobs or the overpaid speaking engagements they will get from their corporate masters once they leave office.

The fact is, our government does not work for us anymore, if it ever did after WWII. Corporate is King and we are the peons. Most of what has happened in the last two decades is that a somewhat workable capitalism has been altered by ever-expanding corporate conglomerates to be more laissez-faire and international, and then sent into the ether by derivatives and other sorts of "magical" financial instruments so that the Masters of the Universe can more effectively steal from the rest of us.

I heartily agree that the system needs to be changed; but that change will have to come from the enraged bottom up, not from the "fat-cat" top down. "Trickle down" does not work in any regard, monetarily, psychologically, or socially.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Free market bs
Posted by: wjfaust on Feb 9, 2009 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is another compelling reason to dismiss the current markets as free: the number of suppliers. A "free market" assumes numerous, relatively small suppliers, none of whom can control price. This ensures real competition and generally a minimal price for goods that rewards those who are efficient. However, the markets for nearly every sector in our economy are dominated by a handful of suppliers who jointly control a large percentage of the total market.

It doesn't require explicit collusion to "fix prices." If you are Shell, why would you engage in a war with Exxon just to increase your market share a couple of percentage points at a much lower price? Better to simply stay within a few cents/gallon and reap much larger profits with your already-substantial market.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A good progressive economist anticipated this column
Posted by: Jim Lance on Feb 9, 2009 12:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Progressive economist and academic Mark Martinez has a similar take on the situation. I encourage people to check out his blog and radio show:

http://markmartinezshow.blogspot.com/search/label/Fairytopia

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Best Example of Free Market? Prohibition against interference in interstate commerce.
Posted by: wmichaeltrout on Feb 9, 2009 2:43 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It has worked here, why not with the rest of the world? The constitutional prohibition against interference in interstate commerce has produced, cumulatively among the 50 states, the strongest economy in the world. Anything less would never have produced the countless achievements and opportunities that exist in the United States, and which do not exist in countries that practice protectionism in the form of import duties and tariffs, and the like. Most of Latin America's weak economies are the result of those backward policies. The wealthy can get whatever they want, but there is a dearth of modern consumer goods available to the vast majority of poorer residents, and a lack of economic activity around the business of buying, selling, and importing those goods.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Free market = married bachelor
Posted by: Canute on Feb 10, 2009 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like to see the phrase "free market" banished from common usage. It is an oxymoron. A market is a set of rules governing, and therefore enabling, the transaction of business. "Free" in this context means unrestricted or unregulated.

There is no such thing as an unregulated set of regulations. Given that we all have different amounts of money at our disposal, different levels of knowledge, and different skills at commerce, there is no such thing as a "level playing field" either.

The phrase "free market" is a lie designed to cover up a set of regulations skewed to benefit a wealthy minority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]